SPRINGFIELD COLLEGE
1971 Humanics Address
by H. H. Giles
Human Nature and Human Affairs
Introductory
After spending most of my life experimenting in the classroom at various levels of schooling, I have more recently (the past twenty-odd years) been concentrating on midwifery for doctoral studies and the advisement of students who need to learn skills in the care and feeding of sponsoring committee members. At the same time I have continued some experimentation in teaching and its evaluation, and certain contacts with agencies which deal with contemporary problems in schools and communities.
The net of all this is that while I have arrived at some firm convictions (of which I will speak) the firmest of all is that to understand and assess a particular event or phenomenon it is essential to know its matrix: its place, time, surrounding factors, history.
Since I have only begun to get acquainted with Springfield College, and despite the warmth and courtesy shown me by the President, the dean, the division heads, department chairmen, professors, students, secretaries, and others, I am only a beginning learner here. You must allow me, therefore, to speak of the Humanics ideal in general, in terms of study, theoretical concepts and practice from my total experience, not from what you might prefer, a thorough and systematic examination of Springfield itself.
That is not to say that I have not formed some impressions here, among them the sense of lively, forward-looking minds at work, and at the same time, a treasuring of tradition. This latter is why I am here, I suppose, connected to you by my interest in humanity.
Sixty-five years ago, "humanics" was chosen as the best word to describe the Springfield degree program. In the words of Dr. Doggett - familiar to you all, but not, heretofore to me. Please allow me to quote them.
" . . . it seems appropriate to explain how we came to use the term "humanics." One day in 1905, nine years after I had come to the school, Professor Burr and I, sitting in my office, were discussing a question that had often arisen - what sort of degree we ought to confer. I pointed out that we needed to find a word that would connote the study of man. We thought of the term "humanities ," but this had been used since the Renaissance to refer to the study of the classics, so the term Bachelor of Humanities would be misunderstood. Since our students were going to work among men, we felt that they should study man. Professor Burr picked up a dictionary and, running his finger down the page on which was the word "humanities," came upon the word "Humanics," which was defined as "the study of human nature" . . . (A present-day dictionary defines "humanics" as the science or study of human nature and human affairs.). We agreed that this was the word which came closest to a technical description of our curriculum."*
Later, says Dr. Doggett, M.I.T. appointed a professor of Humanics to teach both basic and advanced courses dealing with human relationships.
My predecessor, Seth Arsenian, has stated so well the meanings of Humanics as they appear to a contemporary social scientist, that I shall take them as read. Yet I will give a preliminary statement of my own about Human Nature, through formulation of certain premises about man - individual and social. These premises along with the meanings described by Arsenian, I consider basic to a consideration of the educational task, - how a school may gear itself to the development of students who are vitally aware and active for good in human affairs. When both have been given, I want to turn to the final theme of any discourse: The Means Determine the Ends.
________________
*Doggett, Laurence Locke: Man and a School; Pioneering in Higher Education at Springfield College. Association Press, N.Y. 1943, p. 89.
I - Story of a Search
As an undergraduate student at Amherst College in the early twenties I heard men like Meiklejohn, Ayres and Hamilton talk much of democracy. In a small seminar with them, a few of us became deeply convinced of its importance. As a worker in the slums of Holyoke and Chicago and as a teacher in the Experimental College at Wisconsin and the Experimental Schools at Ohio State, I deepened my own sense of the importance of democratic values - equality of opportunity, equal justice, participation in the decisions that affect our lives. My devotion to the ideals that had been forged by brave men and brilliant thinkers in England and on the Continent of Europe, by still earlier thinkers of classical times, by our Founding Fathers in this country, and by all those who set themselves to create a new day for man in this new land, - that devotion became a profound commitment with me as I worked and did research over the country in the 8 - year study.
And then, one day it occurred to me that these great and noble ideals might never work - not because we didn't try, but because the nature of man and the universe might not allow it.
So I set myself to study what the geneticists, the psychologists, the sociologists, the anthropologists, the educators and others had to report as "hard" fact about human nature and the nature of our world.
Some of the specific questions that led to this study were these:
Is man after all a machine, with machine-like inputs and responses?
 Is man, at the core, a selfish, self-centered being who must be coerced to work, to conform, and to keep the peace, or enticed to do so by appeals to his greed?
 Is man, unable to be free, in constant need of authoritarian leadership for direction, a herd animal?  Is it inevitable that one who succeeds must do so at the expense of others who fail or are made to serve as stepping stones?
 Are classes and class antagonisms inevitable? Race conflicts? Religions? National?
 Is man hag-ridden by guilt and aggression so that his impulses are destructive, often unmanageably so?
Yes!.... Man is a greedy, self-centered being said the classical economists and many prophets of our business civilization.
Yes!.... Man is machine-like, said the Loeb brothers, John B. Watson and others. (NO! said Norbert Weiner, that is the worst fallacy we could swallow)
Yes!.... Man seems unable to be free and is in need of authoritarian control say the power-seekers and their sycophants. And, also, come the questions that Fromm raises in Escape From Freedom, and Riesman, following Durkheim, with his Lonely Crowd.
Yes!.... It is every man for himself and the devil take the hindmost, say the social Darwinists.
Yes!.... There must be classes and clashes, says Ralph Linton, and Yes! under the capitalistic system, said Marx.
Yes!.... Man's load of guilt and aggression is clinically established, and leads to many types of destructive expression, says Freud.
When I began serious study of these matters in 1940, it was, as I have said, to test the feasibility of the democratic ideal and the evidence for assertions which contra-indicate its possibility of ever being put more fully into practice. In 1971 these questions become more urgent still - perhaps ultimately so. Aurelio Peccei, prominent industrial executive* has said it well. Writing in the New York Times for February 18, 1971, he points to the urgencies of the human predicament due to the organic changes in the human condition which has, he says, "upset the reference base on which centuries and millenia of past generations founded their intuition, and behavior, built up their values and experience and tested their judgment and wisdom."
__________________
Peccei is Vice Chairman of the board of Olivetti and a founder of the Club of Rome, an international study group.
Peccei points out that man can now release at will with push-button suddenness, tremendous nuclear energy; has overexploited and polluted his environment, and outbred and decimated all other forms of life. (We have exterminated 100 species in the past 50 years, I am told. "Man, the Paranoid Predator," said one who commented on this fact) But this terrestrial domain is finite, and Peccei calls on us all to consider that fact.
In the search, begun so long ago, and in the time since, it has become more and more apparent to me, from experience as well as from the findings of the social sciences, that the nature of man is that of a creature whose potential is enormous, and very heavily determined by learnings and opportunities in the environment. If this be true, the educator who is specially placed to provide such opportunities and environment must answer to his fellow men for all that he does or fails to do in fostering human development.
It is also evident, that those who set the policies and do the teaching in educational institutions are following the paths they choose because of the theories they have, just like all other human beings, whose every act of every day is influenced by theory - the beliefs, values and patterns of relationship that they hold to be true. And it is the recognition of this, and a careful examination of the evidence which can lead to a recognition of how we stand with regard to such questions as social Darwinism.
My own attempt has led me to the conclusion that almost the only thing we can say about living protoplasm with real objectivity is that it is adient and abient, that is, that it grows, moves, behaves in a going-toward or going-away from fashion. Beyond that, however, it seems to me to be possible to say that such movement or change results in growth or its opposite, in some manner, and to some degree. (Growth is here taken to mean increasing adequacy of structure and function for purpose. Further, it appears that to speak broadly, we can identify as the three primary and inclusive drives of human beings - a) survival; b) belonging; c) growth or Development.)
It is a fact that all organisms which are "normal" (within wide limits) do grow. And it appears to be a fact that human beings not only grow, but want first to survive, then very deeply, to grow, to develop, to use all of their capacities. And there seems to be evidence that from the single cell to the whole being, the chief and pervasive condition of growth is belonging, I suspect that this is true of any social group which seeks a continuing life as a group, as well.
If we accept these generalizations or even that truth lies in these directions, then, of course, we must be very much impressed by the importance of economic, moral , political and educational implications which can be drawn from them. Such as the importance of assuring survival, not least to the poor in the crowded slum. Such as the importance of acceptance and respect, recognition, status, and love in the relationships between us. And such as the crucial importance of finding better ways to encourage the development or growth which now we so often find ourselves obstructing or ending.
From the geneticists we have learned such things as that each organ has its time of origin, that each individual and its parts have a particular time and rate of growth and that each is unique in this time and rate. We learn, too, that the rise of intelligence follows its characteristic time sequence. We learn that the differentiation of bodily organs proceeds from the general to the specific, and so, too, the movements of the body - from large mass reactions or movements to limb movement as a whole until finally a finger or toe can be moved independently.
Time, uniqueness, beginning with the whole before coming to the part: there are possible implications here for emotional and intellectual growth as well as for the physical, it seems to me, and the early studies of Prescott, along with the clinical work of psychiatrists and psychotherapists, seems to confirm it.
A final word before we turn from studies which focus on the biologic nature of man.
A great deal of heat used to emerge from discussions of what was known as the "nature-nurture" controversy. I believe that all of us here would agree with such a statement as was made by C.M. Child, long ago, when he said," . .. development is not a spontaneous process, but a process of protoplasmic education...We find . ..that the same kind of protoplasm may give very different results according to its education." Yet still, today, in New York City educational circles one may encounter a good number of those who call themselves teachers, and who tend to deny the importance of environment and its educational features. There are even those in some institutions who make remarks like "Born lazy! Born stupid!"
This is important, because as you know it has been demonstrated that the actual performance of students in their work has a considerable relationship to the belief and expectation that the teacher and their classmates have of them.
_____________
In addition to the Biologic studies that have contributed so much to our understanding of man and his nature, and the whole realm of psychological research and theory (not quite so clear, perhaps, but stimulating!) we have the sociological studies of social constructs and their effects, and the anthropological studies of both primitive and other social groups and cases. We have, too, the opening of great vistas beyond earlier thinking, through the work of physical scientists in field theory and relativity. Wheeler and Perkins made early use of field theory in formulating propositions concerning the nature of man and his relationships to the environment. Kurt Lewin has made basic contributions to the employment of field concepts in interpreting man and social relationships.
From all those who study man in social groups we hear again and again, that human energy is channeled environmentally and culturally (that is, by physical and social gradients); that every human action leads to reaction and that hostile action or reaction is channeled in culturally approved directions.
Such learnings make us highly sensitive and aware of the power of the large culture and, too of sub-cultures. Thus, when we form what is currently called an "intentional" group, whether it is a classroom group or a hippie commune, we can, if we are wise, recognize the power which, if successful, that group may exercise on the form, rate and direction of development in its members.
______________
My search has led me, so far, to believe that if the democratic way of life is, as I think, for the purpose of contributing to the fullest growth or development of all, then it is indeed in accord, and most fully in accord, with the nature of man and his deepest desires. Whether it is possible to implement the democratic purpose through institutional education is not so easy to say. We all, students and faculty alike, in the schools and colleges where I have taught, seem much more familiar with authoritarian controls, purposes and methods than with those of participation in planning, work and evaluation. I do, however, strongly believe that the effort must be made, and where already made must continue and improve. I see it as the best hope we have. The problems involved are the subject of the final section of this statement.
II
The Means Determine the Ends
The paradox in this title is intended to report truly that whatever the intention, the means employed to carry it out will have a determining effect on the result. Of course, in these times we know that there is no such thing as a final result. Everything is a part of unending process. So the Hindus thought. So the modern physical scientist thinks. So the student of behavior finds it.
If this is so, it is no longer tenable for a professor to say, "I do not practice what I preach" with regard to learning theory, or still worse (as I have seen it in more than one university) for educational specialists in Schools of Education to conduct classes as though nothing had been learned about learning since ancient times.
I thought of this when I was in India in 1964 and saw the classes at Shantineketin, Rabindanath Tagore's College. They met in little groups, under the trees of the great plain there. Wonderful to see classes so small, in such a free setting! But what were they doing, sad to say? Listening to the teacher speak, then repeating his words, to memorize them.
If we can truly accept the goal of humanics as the fullest possible development of man in all his being and potential, then our task becomes that of finding out the best ways to serve this great purpose. Thus I wish to turn, now, to some implications of the foregoing findings and principles. Implications for practice from successive experience and studies that tell us of man, his nature and the nature of his universe, so far as we know them. Modern genetics, pragmatic philosophy, Freud's great theoretical constructs, behavioristic interpretations, relativity, field theory, the Gestalt idea, personalogy, emergent meanings and situations - existentialism, comparative studies of cultures and sub-cultures; symbols and symbolic behaviors; social constructs; the meanings we attach to the computerized world - all part of man's search for the understanding of himself, his fellows, and the means of dealing with his own life, his own place of being and his times. As I make this attempt, I recognize that in the course of my experience as a teacher (beginning in 1922 when I was employed as an assistant coach at Deerfield Academy) I came to hold a good many notions simply through trial and error - mostly the latter, I am afraid. Thus, at Holyoke, in 1923 I found, conclusively for me, that poverty is not necessarily to be equated with sloth or stupidity, as some of my childhood mentors had taught me. In Eastern Illinois State Teachers College, a couple of years later, I made two or three startling discoveries; that praise can help improve performance of students; that field study brings relevance to classroom work; and that Burl Ives could never learn to kick a football very well.
At the Experimental College at Wisconsin I learned that the college experience could contribute to the examined life - the only life worth living. I also learned the joy of being an avowed learner, along with my students, rather than the professor who knows all the answers. In the English department of the University I learned by a little test project that we all took part in that the identical paper which one of the faculty graded "A" was graded "B", "C", "D", and "F" by others.
At West Georgia College I learned that the experience of wrestling with field problems led to a hunger for all that the experts and the books could tell At the center for Human Relations Studiesof NYU I learned that a faculty team representing 9 specialties could learn to exchange ideas and to involve graduate students in planning the evaluation, but that it takes a bit of doing!
Perhaps, then, I should call this section, "Prejudice." However, I shall stick to my theme: The means determine the ends.
Some of us at NYU who have been involved over a period of years in developing use of a clinical mathod for analizing social conflict have found many of the conflicts examined show that the use of force as a method by one party to the conflict tends always to result in the use of retaliative force by the other. We have found also that workers in business and industry testify that their resentments against management stem not so much from the work assigned as from the way, the method, by which supervision or compulsion is applied. Conflicts over racial issues in the schools and communities have been found not always to be over the goals. They are, more often than not, over how to get there - the method.
In addition to such evidence, we all know that the psychiatrists and psychotherapists are kept busy with people who bear deep resentments toward parents and others whom they feel have treated them unjustly - who have employed methods of relating which antagonize or humiliate.
And so it goes.
If we recognize the importance of the how, the method, and if we accept some findings which have been emerging from many fields of inquiry, then the changes in most schools and colleges would be notable.
To grant the uniqueness of each individual and group is to abolish lockstep procedures and mass "instruction" (so-called).
To grant the unknown limits of human potential is to recognize that the student failure, student indifference, are symptoms of something wrong in the way we are doing it, or in the deeper parts of the individuals concerned. Whichever it is, it calls for inquiry and a change in method of treatment, it is a diagnostic aid.
To grant the power of the growth drive is to realize that every one wants to achieve well (even when appearances are contrary). Artificial or extrinsic rewards, and penalties such as grades or scores on a standardized test may very well be obstructive of the deep desire to develop and to master. They may, indeed, as we all know, lead to a superficial rather than a deeper exploration. It is the beauty and utility of what he produces that are the evaluative bases for. the learner.
If the democratic way of life or republican forms of government are seen by us as good for the general development of all, then we will help find ways by which our students take part in planning, doing and evaluating- singly and in groups. Making wise choices is learned by making choices.
In higher education one might reasonably expect to find the full flowering of independent, tempered thinking and judgement; of close and understanding comradeship between the teacher - learner and the student - learner, of a continuous interaction between the student's experience of problems of our time and his study of the research and theory which may help to guide his action. Here, above all, each class group and each individual in it, would be a subject for study by the teacher. And since "to teach" is really a reflexive verb - one teaches one`s self - the teacher in higher education will be a master facilitator of self teaching. By his own life and work he will be an exemplar; by his skillful responses to requests for aid; by his knowledge of reference sources by his ability to help groups organize and find effective patterns of operation; by his true reliance on the self-evaluation of the learner of himself, his group, and the professor - in all these ways the teacher as facilitator will, like the science "experiments" which are not experiments, literature classes in which analysis of esoteric minutiae takes precedence over discussion of the grand design and its meaning to mankind; coaches who display the will to dominate rather than the spirit and the skill of the true teacher; fine arts which become playthings of pedants who know not whereof they speak - the creative process; psychology which has more to do with rats than humans; sociology which seeks not what the implications for responsible citizen action are, but only the sideline second-guesser role; all "education" which ignores what we know about the nature of learning.
It seems to me, so far as I can tell by my very happy conferences so far, that Springfield has known most of this and acted on it. However that may be (and I await invitations to classes), I want to return to the announced theme.
If human potential is far beyond anything we have seen and if each person and group are unique we have the question: How do we, here in this place, each of us - administration with professors, and staff, professors with students, and students with each other, feel encouraged by the atmosphere of our institution, to aid development to the utmost?
Dr. Jack Ellner has shown how the thin layer of cerebral cortex is often dominated by the age-old portion of our central nervous system - what he calls "the Old Brain." Dr. Lawrence Kubie, eminent psychiatrist has said, Without self-understanding, the man of intellect is but an infant."
If it is true that emotion is that important, and if emotional growth, then, is basic to intellectual growth, we must ask ourselves in as many ways and times as we can, "How do I, how can I, take full account of the emotional state of being of my students?"
In considering this, there is the eternal question of readiness to learn - what Jay Nash called the Teachable Monaent. From my own shortcomings in this respect, I am forced to conclude that it is, perhaps from fatigue with one's own inner struggles, that one often fails to pay full account to the feelings, desires, interests and prejudices of students, both as components in determining forms of procedure, and as foci for education. Now and then I encounter a college teacher like the one I rode in the elevator with in New York who remarked quite seriously: "Education is the only business where the customer is always wrong." Others have expressed ideas commensurate with: "I will cast my pearls, and if the swine refuse them, it is because they are swine, and there is nothing I can do about it." Of course, such an attitude, as we all know, along with others which result in punitive grading, lofty indifference and insensitive response, can quite readily destroy the first requisite to learning - self-respect.
Allied to the emotional components of our work, is the importance of the background, the general culture and the sub-cultural patterns which have affected the development of our students and which now affect them. Sapir, Benedict and Mead have done yeoman work to make us aware of the importance of these cultural influences. Yet, at one of the most noted colleges in America, well known for its many experimental and unorthodox programs, I heard a counselor inveigh against the "innocence" of the faculty which, he said, insulates itself in so many ways from knowledge of the facts of life about students. These facts include the many ways in which attitudes and practice, whether in sex relations or in social protest - are being built and changed into a different way of life for many young people. Such are the facts, whether the new ways are good or bad. If bad, it is particularly unhappy when we cling to our myths in the face of change in facts.
The above brings us to Generation Gap country and the eternal problem of communication. Semantics, beginning with the work of Ogden and Richards and of Korzybski, has made us of this century particularly aware of communication problems. Man's communication concerns go back as far as man, I am sure, but modern scholarship has driven home two things: common referents are requisite to common understanding, and discriminating perception is required of both speaker and listener. Yet, how many classes of college students share in common experiences which are full of meaning to them? How many teachers stress word abstractions and technical jargon before there are the basic experiences to make them understood?
In this last respect, I must applaud the pervasive use of activity field observation, and intern type of experience, not in one division only but in all, as far as may be told from the talks I have had so far with department and division heads at Springfield.
__________
III In Conclusion
The child has endless curiosity, until it is dulled by bad management on the part of his elders, at home or in school. The college student has learned much about the masks of compliance and evasion, yet still, beneath it all, he is human, he endlessly seeks for meaning.
Knowing these things, learning by accretion has given way, as a principle we can believe in, to perception of relationships, and to the development of initiative.
In Out of My Later Years, Albert Einstein stated: "The most important method of education, accordingly, always has consisted of that in which the pupil was urged to actual performance.... But behind every achievement exists the motivation which is at the foundation of it and which in turn is strengthened and nourished by the accomplishment of the undertaking.
"To me the worst thing seems to be for a school principally to work with methods of fear, force and artificially authority. Such a treatment destroys the sound sentiments, the sincerity and the self-confidence of the pupil. It produces the submissive subject. It is no wonder that such schools are the rule in Germany and Russia."
Such sentiments accord perfectly with those of our great philosopher of education, John Dewey. To him we owe the special recognition of what is called "Problem-centered education." It was his intention to show the need for the learner to work at problems of his own choosing or volition, as now we see done in the Leicestershire schools in England, and at the New Experimental College in Thuy, Denmark, and for a quarter century at Goddard College in Vermont.
Yet we may broaden our concern to this final question: Considering the problems of our time: e.g. war as an instrument of national policy: genocidal weapons, atomic biologic and chemical; our destruction of the limited resources of earth; human relations - racial, religious, nationality, employer-employee, family; the ugliness of cities and their crampled resources for play of the spirit and of the body - is there more that we can do as educators, and are there better ways yet to be tried?
I like the way C. P. Snow has put the problem of educators in our time.
"Escaping the dangers of applied science is one thing. Doing the simple and manifest good which applied science has put in our power is another, more difficult, more demanding of human qualities, and in the long-run far more enriching to us all. It will need energy, self-knowledge, new skills. It will need new perceptions into both closed and open politics.
(In saying this)" . . . I was talking primarily to educators and those being educated, about something which we all understand and which is within our grasp. Changes in education will not, by themselves solve our problems: but without those changes we shan't even realize what the problems are..." Not to be
" . . . ignorant of imaginative experience, both in the arts and in science, nor ignorant either of the endowments of applied science, of the remediable suffering of most of their fellow humans, and of the responsibilities which, once they are seen, cannot be denied."*
The stakes are very high.
In our time, when the development of human understanding is so urgent to human life, it may be crucial to us to know that whatever our goals and good intentions, how we do it makes all the difference in what the results can be.
_________
/
End _______________________________________________________
*Snow, C.P.: The Two Cultures and a Second look. Cambridge University Press (paperback), Cambridge, 1969. pp. 99, 100.
H. H. Giles
Humanics Address
1971
A partial Bibliography
Allport, Gordon W.: Personality, A Psychological Interpretation, Henry Holt and Co., N.Y. 1937
Benedict, Ruth: Patterns of Culture, Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston. 1934
Boas, Franz: "The Growth of Children as Influenced by Enviromental Hereditary Conditions", School and Society, March, 1923.
Brameld, Theodore: The Climatic Decades, Praeger, N.Y., 1970.
Carmichael, L.:"Hereditary and Enviroment: Are they Anti Theoretical?" Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, XX, 1928
Child, C. M.: "The Individual and the Enviroment from a Physiological Viewpoint," in The Child, the Clinic, and the Court, New Republic Publishing Co., N.Y. 1925
Dewey, John: Democracy and Education , the MacMillan Co., N.Y. 1924.
__________: Human Nature and Conduct, An Introduction to Social Psychology, Henry Holt & Co0, Inc., N.Y. 1922
Doggett, Laurence Locke: Man and a School; Pioneering in Higher Education at Springfield College. Association Press, N.Y. 1943.
Einstein, Albert: Out of My Later Years. Philosophical Library, N.Y. 1950.
Ellner, Jack: A Systems Analysis Approach to the Comprehension of Human Behavior Based on an Analog-Synelog Informational Theory: An Exploratory Study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, New York University, N.Y., 1969.
Erickson, Erik H.: "Problems of Infancy and Early Childhood," in Cyclopedia of Medicine, Surgery and Specialties, F.A. Davis Co., Philadelphia, 1940.
Freud, Sigmund: The Basic Writings, Modern Library, N.Y. 1938.
Fromm, Erich: Escape from Freedom, Farrar, Straus & Young, Inc., N.y. 1941.
Giles, H. Harry: Human Dynamics and Human Relations Education. New York University Press, N.Y. 1954.
__________"Conflict Episode Analysis-A Tool for Education in Social Technology," Journal of Educational Sociology, February, 1950.
Giles, H. H. and Chandler Montgomery: The Nature of Human Relations Studies (pam.) New York University, The Center for Human Relations Studies, 1953.
__________, S.P. McCutchen, and A.N. Zechiel: Exploring the Curriculum, Adventure in American Education Series, Vol. II. Harper & Bros., N.Y. 1942.
Giles, H. Harry: "Seven Strangers at the Feast," Teaching Aids News; the Magazine of Educational Technology. June 15, 1965.
Jennings, H.S.: The Biological Basis of Human Nature. W.W. Norton & Co., Inc. N.Y. 1930.
Kohler, Wolfgang: Gestalt Psychology. Sweright Publishing Corp; N.Y. 1921.
Korzybski, Alfred: Science and Sanity, Science Press, N.Y., 1933.
Laing, R.D.: The Politics of Experience, Pantheon Books, N.Y. 1967.
Lewin, Kurt: A Dynamic Theory of Personality. Translated by D.K. Adams and K.E. Zaner, Mc-Graw-Hill Book Co., Inc., N.Y. 1935.
__________ :"The Conceptual Representation and the Measurement of Psychological Forces," Contributions to Psychological Theory, I. No. 4. Serial No. 4. Duke University Press, Durham, N.C., 1938.
Linton, Ralph: The Tree of Culture. Alfred A. Knopf, N.Y. 1955.
Marlow, A.H.: "Self-Actualizing People: "A Study of Psychological Health," in Personality Symposium No. 1, W. Wolff, Editor. Grune & Stratton, 1950.
Loeb, Jacques: The Medianistic Conception of Life. University of Chicago Press., Chicago, 1912.
Nielsen, Page, Rosendal, with others: Lust for Learning., New Experimental College. , Thy, Denmark, 1968.
Pitkin, Royce: The College in a Chaotic World, A Second Look, Goddard College, Plainfield, 1968. (pam.)
Prescott, Daniel: Emotion and the Educative Process. American Council on Education, Washington, D.C. 1938. Riesman, David, with Nathan Glazer and Rue1 Denney: The Lonely Crowd; a Study of the Changing American Character. Yale University Press, New Haven, 1969.
Rogers, Carl R.: On Becoming a Person, Houghton Mifflin Co., Sentry Ed. 60. Boston, 1961.
Schuler, Edgar A., Thomas F. Hoult, Duane L. Gibson, Maude L. Fiero, Wilbur B. Brookover: Readings in Sociology, Second Edition. Thomas Y. Crowell Co., N.Y. 1960.
Sinnott, Edmund W., L.C. Dunn and Dr. Dobzhansky: Principles of Genetics., McGraw-Hill Book Co., N.Y. 1950, P. 405.
Skinner, B.F.: Science and Human Behavior. The Free Press, N.Y. 1965, , paperback.
Snow, C.P.: The Two Cultures and a Second Look. Cambridge University Press (paperback), Cambridge, 1969.
Wheeler, Raymond and Francis Perkins: Principles of Mental Development. Thomas Y. Crowell Co., N.Y., 1932.
Wiener, Norbert: The Human Use of Human Beings. Doubleday Anchor, Garden city, 1954.
Young, Kimball: Personality and Problems of Adjustment, Appleton-Century- Crofts, Inc., N.Y. 1940.

Click tabs to swap between content that is broken into logical sections.

SPRINGFIELD COLLEGE
1971 Humanics Address
by H. H. Giles
Human Nature and Human Affairs
Introductory
After spending most of my life experimenting in the classroom at various levels of schooling, I have more recently (the past twenty-odd years) been concentrating on midwifery for doctoral studies and the advisement of students who need to learn skills in the care and feeding of sponsoring committee members. At the same time I have continued some experimentation in teaching and its evaluation, and certain contacts with agencies which deal with contemporary problems in schools and communities.
The net of all this is that while I have arrived at some firm convictions (of which I will speak) the firmest of all is that to understand and assess a particular event or phenomenon it is essential to know its matrix: its place, time, surrounding factors, history.
Since I have only begun to get acquainted with Springfield College, and despite the warmth and courtesy shown me by the President, the dean, the division heads, department chairmen, professors, students, secretaries, and others, I am only a beginning learner here. You must allow me, therefore, to speak of the Humanics ideal in general, in terms of study, theoretical concepts and practice from my total experience, not from what you might prefer, a thorough and systematic examination of Springfield itself.
That is not to say that I have not formed some impressions here, among them the sense of lively, forward-looking minds at work, and at the same time, a treasuring of tradition. This latter is why I am here, I suppose, connected to you by my interest in humanity.
Sixty-five years ago, "humanics" was chosen as the best word to describe the Springfield degree program. In the words of Dr. Doggett - familiar to you all, but not, heretofore to me. Please allow me to quote them.
" . . . it seems appropriate to explain how we came to use the term "humanics." One day in 1905, nine years after I had come to the school, Professor Burr and I, sitting in my office, were discussing a question that had often arisen - what sort of degree we ought to confer. I pointed out that we needed to find a word that would connote the study of man. We thought of the term "humanities ," but this had been used since the Renaissance to refer to the study of the classics, so the term Bachelor of Humanities would be misunderstood. Since our students were going to work among men, we felt that they should study man. Professor Burr picked up a dictionary and, running his finger down the page on which was the word "humanities," came upon the word "Humanics," which was defined as "the study of human nature" . . . (A present-day dictionary defines "humanics" as the science or study of human nature and human affairs.). We agreed that this was the word which came closest to a technical description of our curriculum."*
Later, says Dr. Doggett, M.I.T. appointed a professor of Humanics to teach both basic and advanced courses dealing with human relationships.
My predecessor, Seth Arsenian, has stated so well the meanings of Humanics as they appear to a contemporary social scientist, that I shall take them as read. Yet I will give a preliminary statement of my own about Human Nature, through formulation of certain premises about man - individual and social. These premises along with the meanings described by Arsenian, I consider basic to a consideration of the educational task, - how a school may gear itself to the development of students who are vitally aware and active for good in human affairs. When both have been given, I want to turn to the final theme of any discourse: The Means Determine the Ends.
________________
*Doggett, Laurence Locke: Man and a School; Pioneering in Higher Education at Springfield College. Association Press, N.Y. 1943, p. 89.
I - Story of a Search
As an undergraduate student at Amherst College in the early twenties I heard men like Meiklejohn, Ayres and Hamilton talk much of democracy. In a small seminar with them, a few of us became deeply convinced of its importance. As a worker in the slums of Holyoke and Chicago and as a teacher in the Experimental College at Wisconsin and the Experimental Schools at Ohio State, I deepened my own sense of the importance of democratic values - equality of opportunity, equal justice, participation in the decisions that affect our lives. My devotion to the ideals that had been forged by brave men and brilliant thinkers in England and on the Continent of Europe, by still earlier thinkers of classical times, by our Founding Fathers in this country, and by all those who set themselves to create a new day for man in this new land, - that devotion became a profound commitment with me as I worked and did research over the country in the 8 - year study.
And then, one day it occurred to me that these great and noble ideals might never work - not because we didn't try, but because the nature of man and the universe might not allow it.
So I set myself to study what the geneticists, the psychologists, the sociologists, the anthropologists, the educators and others had to report as "hard" fact about human nature and the nature of our world.
Some of the specific questions that led to this study were these:
Is man after all a machine, with machine-like inputs and responses?
 Is man, at the core, a selfish, self-centered being who must be coerced to work, to conform, and to keep the peace, or enticed to do so by appeals to his greed?
 Is man, unable to be free, in constant need of authoritarian leadership for direction, a herd animal?  Is it inevitable that one who succeeds must do so at the expense of others who fail or are made to serve as stepping stones?
 Are classes and class antagonisms inevitable? Race conflicts? Religions? National?
 Is man hag-ridden by guilt and aggression so that his impulses are destructive, often unmanageably so?
Yes!.... Man is a greedy, self-centered being said the classical economists and many prophets of our business civilization.
Yes!.... Man is machine-like, said the Loeb brothers, John B. Watson and others. (NO! said Norbert Weiner, that is the worst fallacy we could swallow)
Yes!.... Man seems unable to be free and is in need of authoritarian control say the power-seekers and their sycophants. And, also, come the questions that Fromm raises in Escape From Freedom, and Riesman, following Durkheim, with his Lonely Crowd.
Yes!.... It is every man for himself and the devil take the hindmost, say the social Darwinists.
Yes!.... There must be classes and clashes, says Ralph Linton, and Yes! under the capitalistic system, said Marx.
Yes!.... Man's load of guilt and aggression is clinically established, and leads to many types of destructive expression, says Freud.
When I began serious study of these matters in 1940, it was, as I have said, to test the feasibility of the democratic ideal and the evidence for assertions which contra-indicate its possibility of ever being put more fully into practice. In 1971 these questions become more urgent still - perhaps ultimately so. Aurelio Peccei, prominent industrial executive* has said it well. Writing in the New York Times for February 18, 1971, he points to the urgencies of the human predicament due to the organic changes in the human condition which has, he says, "upset the reference base on which centuries and millenia of past generations founded their intuition, and behavior, built up their values and experience and tested their judgment and wisdom."
__________________
Peccei is Vice Chairman of the board of Olivetti and a founder of the Club of Rome, an international study group.
Peccei points out that man can now release at will with push-button suddenness, tremendous nuclear energy; has overexploited and polluted his environment, and outbred and decimated all other forms of life. (We have exterminated 100 species in the past 50 years, I am told. "Man, the Paranoid Predator," said one who commented on this fact) But this terrestrial domain is finite, and Peccei calls on us all to consider that fact.
In the search, begun so long ago, and in the time since, it has become more and more apparent to me, from experience as well as from the findings of the social sciences, that the nature of man is that of a creature whose potential is enormous, and very heavily determined by learnings and opportunities in the environment. If this be true, the educator who is specially placed to provide such opportunities and environment must answer to his fellow men for all that he does or fails to do in fostering human development.
It is also evident, that those who set the policies and do the teaching in educational institutions are following the paths they choose because of the theories they have, just like all other human beings, whose every act of every day is influenced by theory - the beliefs, values and patterns of relationship that they hold to be true. And it is the recognition of this, and a careful examination of the evidence which can lead to a recognition of how we stand with regard to such questions as social Darwinism.
My own attempt has led me to the conclusion that almost the only thing we can say about living protoplasm with real objectivity is that it is adient and abient, that is, that it grows, moves, behaves in a going-toward or going-away from fashion. Beyond that, however, it seems to me to be possible to say that such movement or change results in growth or its opposite, in some manner, and to some degree. (Growth is here taken to mean increasing adequacy of structure and function for purpose. Further, it appears that to speak broadly, we can identify as the three primary and inclusive drives of human beings - a) survival; b) belonging; c) growth or Development.)
It is a fact that all organisms which are "normal" (within wide limits) do grow. And it appears to be a fact that human beings not only grow, but want first to survive, then very deeply, to grow, to develop, to use all of their capacities. And there seems to be evidence that from the single cell to the whole being, the chief and pervasive condition of growth is belonging, I suspect that this is true of any social group which seeks a continuing life as a group, as well.
If we accept these generalizations or even that truth lies in these directions, then, of course, we must be very much impressed by the importance of economic, moral , political and educational implications which can be drawn from them. Such as the importance of assuring survival, not least to the poor in the crowded slum. Such as the importance of acceptance and respect, recognition, status, and love in the relationships between us. And such as the crucial importance of finding better ways to encourage the development or growth which now we so often find ourselves obstructing or ending.
From the geneticists we have learned such things as that each organ has its time of origin, that each individual and its parts have a particular time and rate of growth and that each is unique in this time and rate. We learn, too, that the rise of intelligence follows its characteristic time sequence. We learn that the differentiation of bodily organs proceeds from the general to the specific, and so, too, the movements of the body - from large mass reactions or movements to limb movement as a whole until finally a finger or toe can be moved independently.
Time, uniqueness, beginning with the whole before coming to the part: there are possible implications here for emotional and intellectual growth as well as for the physical, it seems to me, and the early studies of Prescott, along with the clinical work of psychiatrists and psychotherapists, seems to confirm it.
A final word before we turn from studies which focus on the biologic nature of man.
A great deal of heat used to emerge from discussions of what was known as the "nature-nurture" controversy. I believe that all of us here would agree with such a statement as was made by C.M. Child, long ago, when he said," . .. development is not a spontaneous process, but a process of protoplasmic education...We find . ..that the same kind of protoplasm may give very different results according to its education." Yet still, today, in New York City educational circles one may encounter a good number of those who call themselves teachers, and who tend to deny the importance of environment and its educational features. There are even those in some institutions who make remarks like "Born lazy! Born stupid!"
This is important, because as you know it has been demonstrated that the actual performance of students in their work has a considerable relationship to the belief and expectation that the teacher and their classmates have of them.
_____________
In addition to the Biologic studies that have contributed so much to our understanding of man and his nature, and the whole realm of psychological research and theory (not quite so clear, perhaps, but stimulating!) we have the sociological studies of social constructs and their effects, and the anthropological studies of both primitive and other social groups and cases. We have, too, the opening of great vistas beyond earlier thinking, through the work of physical scientists in field theory and relativity. Wheeler and Perkins made early use of field theory in formulating propositions concerning the nature of man and his relationships to the environment. Kurt Lewin has made basic contributions to the employment of field concepts in interpreting man and social relationships.
From all those who study man in social groups we hear again and again, that human energy is channeled environmentally and culturally (that is, by physical and social gradients); that every human action leads to reaction and that hostile action or reaction is channeled in culturally approved directions.
Such learnings make us highly sensitive and aware of the power of the large culture and, too of sub-cultures. Thus, when we form what is currently called an "intentional" group, whether it is a classroom group or a hippie commune, we can, if we are wise, recognize the power which, if successful, that group may exercise on the form, rate and direction of development in its members.
______________
My search has led me, so far, to believe that if the democratic way of life is, as I think, for the purpose of contributing to the fullest growth or development of all, then it is indeed in accord, and most fully in accord, with the nature of man and his deepest desires. Whether it is possible to implement the democratic purpose through institutional education is not so easy to say. We all, students and faculty alike, in the schools and colleges where I have taught, seem much more familiar with authoritarian controls, purposes and methods than with those of participation in planning, work and evaluation. I do, however, strongly believe that the effort must be made, and where already made must continue and improve. I see it as the best hope we have. The problems involved are the subject of the final section of this statement.
II
The Means Determine the Ends
The paradox in this title is intended to report truly that whatever the intention, the means employed to carry it out will have a determining effect on the result. Of course, in these times we know that there is no such thing as a final result. Everything is a part of unending process. So the Hindus thought. So the modern physical scientist thinks. So the student of behavior finds it.
If this is so, it is no longer tenable for a professor to say, "I do not practice what I preach" with regard to learning theory, or still worse (as I have seen it in more than one university) for educational specialists in Schools of Education to conduct classes as though nothing had been learned about learning since ancient times.
I thought of this when I was in India in 1964 and saw the classes at Shantineketin, Rabindanath Tagore's College. They met in little groups, under the trees of the great plain there. Wonderful to see classes so small, in such a free setting! But what were they doing, sad to say? Listening to the teacher speak, then repeating his words, to memorize them.
If we can truly accept the goal of humanics as the fullest possible development of man in all his being and potential, then our task becomes that of finding out the best ways to serve this great purpose. Thus I wish to turn, now, to some implications of the foregoing findings and principles. Implications for practice from successive experience and studies that tell us of man, his nature and the nature of his universe, so far as we know them. Modern genetics, pragmatic philosophy, Freud's great theoretical constructs, behavioristic interpretations, relativity, field theory, the Gestalt idea, personalogy, emergent meanings and situations - existentialism, comparative studies of cultures and sub-cultures; symbols and symbolic behaviors; social constructs; the meanings we attach to the computerized world - all part of man's search for the understanding of himself, his fellows, and the means of dealing with his own life, his own place of being and his times. As I make this attempt, I recognize that in the course of my experience as a teacher (beginning in 1922 when I was employed as an assistant coach at Deerfield Academy) I came to hold a good many notions simply through trial and error - mostly the latter, I am afraid. Thus, at Holyoke, in 1923 I found, conclusively for me, that poverty is not necessarily to be equated with sloth or stupidity, as some of my childhood mentors had taught me. In Eastern Illinois State Teachers College, a couple of years later, I made two or three startling discoveries; that praise can help improve performance of students; that field study brings relevance to classroom work; and that Burl Ives could never learn to kick a football very well.
At the Experimental College at Wisconsin I learned that the college experience could contribute to the examined life - the only life worth living. I also learned the joy of being an avowed learner, along with my students, rather than the professor who knows all the answers. In the English department of the University I learned by a little test project that we all took part in that the identical paper which one of the faculty graded "A" was graded "B", "C", "D", and "F" by others.
At West Georgia College I learned that the experience of wrestling with field problems led to a hunger for all that the experts and the books could tell At the center for Human Relations Studiesof NYU I learned that a faculty team representing 9 specialties could learn to exchange ideas and to involve graduate students in planning the evaluation, but that it takes a bit of doing!
Perhaps, then, I should call this section, "Prejudice." However, I shall stick to my theme: The means determine the ends.
Some of us at NYU who have been involved over a period of years in developing use of a clinical mathod for analizing social conflict have found many of the conflicts examined show that the use of force as a method by one party to the conflict tends always to result in the use of retaliative force by the other. We have found also that workers in business and industry testify that their resentments against management stem not so much from the work assigned as from the way, the method, by which supervision or compulsion is applied. Conflicts over racial issues in the schools and communities have been found not always to be over the goals. They are, more often than not, over how to get there - the method.
In addition to such evidence, we all know that the psychiatrists and psychotherapists are kept busy with people who bear deep resentments toward parents and others whom they feel have treated them unjustly - who have employed methods of relating which antagonize or humiliate.
And so it goes.
If we recognize the importance of the how, the method, and if we accept some findings which have been emerging from many fields of inquiry, then the changes in most schools and colleges would be notable.
To grant the uniqueness of each individual and group is to abolish lockstep procedures and mass "instruction" (so-called).
To grant the unknown limits of human potential is to recognize that the student failure, student indifference, are symptoms of something wrong in the way we are doing it, or in the deeper parts of the individuals concerned. Whichever it is, it calls for inquiry and a change in method of treatment, it is a diagnostic aid.
To grant the power of the growth drive is to realize that every one wants to achieve well (even when appearances are contrary). Artificial or extrinsic rewards, and penalties such as grades or scores on a standardized test may very well be obstructive of the deep desire to develop and to master. They may, indeed, as we all know, lead to a superficial rather than a deeper exploration. It is the beauty and utility of what he produces that are the evaluative bases for. the learner.
If the democratic way of life or republican forms of government are seen by us as good for the general development of all, then we will help find ways by which our students take part in planning, doing and evaluating- singly and in groups. Making wise choices is learned by making choices.
In higher education one might reasonably expect to find the full flowering of independent, tempered thinking and judgement; of close and understanding comradeship between the teacher - learner and the student - learner, of a continuous interaction between the student's experience of problems of our time and his study of the research and theory which may help to guide his action. Here, above all, each class group and each individual in it, would be a subject for study by the teacher. And since "to teach" is really a reflexive verb - one teaches one`s self - the teacher in higher education will be a master facilitator of self teaching. By his own life and work he will be an exemplar; by his skillful responses to requests for aid; by his knowledge of reference sources by his ability to help groups organize and find effective patterns of operation; by his true reliance on the self-evaluation of the learner of himself, his group, and the professor - in all these ways the teacher as facilitator will, like the science "experiments" which are not experiments, literature classes in which analysis of esoteric minutiae takes precedence over discussion of the grand design and its meaning to mankind; coaches who display the will to dominate rather than the spirit and the skill of the true teacher; fine arts which become playthings of pedants who know not whereof they speak - the creative process; psychology which has more to do with rats than humans; sociology which seeks not what the implications for responsible citizen action are, but only the sideline second-guesser role; all "education" which ignores what we know about the nature of learning.
It seems to me, so far as I can tell by my very happy conferences so far, that Springfield has known most of this and acted on it. However that may be (and I await invitations to classes), I want to return to the announced theme.
If human potential is far beyond anything we have seen and if each person and group are unique we have the question: How do we, here in this place, each of us - administration with professors, and staff, professors with students, and students with each other, feel encouraged by the atmosphere of our institution, to aid development to the utmost?
Dr. Jack Ellner has shown how the thin layer of cerebral cortex is often dominated by the age-old portion of our central nervous system - what he calls "the Old Brain." Dr. Lawrence Kubie, eminent psychiatrist has said, Without self-understanding, the man of intellect is but an infant."
If it is true that emotion is that important, and if emotional growth, then, is basic to intellectual growth, we must ask ourselves in as many ways and times as we can, "How do I, how can I, take full account of the emotional state of being of my students?"
In considering this, there is the eternal question of readiness to learn - what Jay Nash called the Teachable Monaent. From my own shortcomings in this respect, I am forced to conclude that it is, perhaps from fatigue with one's own inner struggles, that one often fails to pay full account to the feelings, desires, interests and prejudices of students, both as components in determining forms of procedure, and as foci for education. Now and then I encounter a college teacher like the one I rode in the elevator with in New York who remarked quite seriously: "Education is the only business where the customer is always wrong." Others have expressed ideas commensurate with: "I will cast my pearls, and if the swine refuse them, it is because they are swine, and there is nothing I can do about it." Of course, such an attitude, as we all know, along with others which result in punitive grading, lofty indifference and insensitive response, can quite readily destroy the first requisite to learning - self-respect.
Allied to the emotional components of our work, is the importance of the background, the general culture and the sub-cultural patterns which have affected the development of our students and which now affect them. Sapir, Benedict and Mead have done yeoman work to make us aware of the importance of these cultural influences. Yet, at one of the most noted colleges in America, well known for its many experimental and unorthodox programs, I heard a counselor inveigh against the "innocence" of the faculty which, he said, insulates itself in so many ways from knowledge of the facts of life about students. These facts include the many ways in which attitudes and practice, whether in sex relations or in social protest - are being built and changed into a different way of life for many young people. Such are the facts, whether the new ways are good or bad. If bad, it is particularly unhappy when we cling to our myths in the face of change in facts.
The above brings us to Generation Gap country and the eternal problem of communication. Semantics, beginning with the work of Ogden and Richards and of Korzybski, has made us of this century particularly aware of communication problems. Man's communication concerns go back as far as man, I am sure, but modern scholarship has driven home two things: common referents are requisite to common understanding, and discriminating perception is required of both speaker and listener. Yet, how many classes of college students share in common experiences which are full of meaning to them? How many teachers stress word abstractions and technical jargon before there are the basic experiences to make them understood?
In this last respect, I must applaud the pervasive use of activity field observation, and intern type of experience, not in one division only but in all, as far as may be told from the talks I have had so far with department and division heads at Springfield.
__________
III In Conclusion
The child has endless curiosity, until it is dulled by bad management on the part of his elders, at home or in school. The college student has learned much about the masks of compliance and evasion, yet still, beneath it all, he is human, he endlessly seeks for meaning.
Knowing these things, learning by accretion has given way, as a principle we can believe in, to perception of relationships, and to the development of initiative.
In Out of My Later Years, Albert Einstein stated: "The most important method of education, accordingly, always has consisted of that in which the pupil was urged to actual performance.... But behind every achievement exists the motivation which is at the foundation of it and which in turn is strengthened and nourished by the accomplishment of the undertaking.
"To me the worst thing seems to be for a school principally to work with methods of fear, force and artificially authority. Such a treatment destroys the sound sentiments, the sincerity and the self-confidence of the pupil. It produces the submissive subject. It is no wonder that such schools are the rule in Germany and Russia."
Such sentiments accord perfectly with those of our great philosopher of education, John Dewey. To him we owe the special recognition of what is called "Problem-centered education." It was his intention to show the need for the learner to work at problems of his own choosing or volition, as now we see done in the Leicestershire schools in England, and at the New Experimental College in Thuy, Denmark, and for a quarter century at Goddard College in Vermont.
Yet we may broaden our concern to this final question: Considering the problems of our time: e.g. war as an instrument of national policy: genocidal weapons, atomic biologic and chemical; our destruction of the limited resources of earth; human relations - racial, religious, nationality, employer-employee, family; the ugliness of cities and their crampled resources for play of the spirit and of the body - is there more that we can do as educators, and are there better ways yet to be tried?
I like the way C. P. Snow has put the problem of educators in our time.
"Escaping the dangers of applied science is one thing. Doing the simple and manifest good which applied science has put in our power is another, more difficult, more demanding of human qualities, and in the long-run far more enriching to us all. It will need energy, self-knowledge, new skills. It will need new perceptions into both closed and open politics.
(In saying this)" . . . I was talking primarily to educators and those being educated, about something which we all understand and which is within our grasp. Changes in education will not, by themselves solve our problems: but without those changes we shan't even realize what the problems are..." Not to be
" . . . ignorant of imaginative experience, both in the arts and in science, nor ignorant either of the endowments of applied science, of the remediable suffering of most of their fellow humans, and of the responsibilities which, once they are seen, cannot be denied."*
The stakes are very high.
In our time, when the development of human understanding is so urgent to human life, it may be crucial to us to know that whatever our goals and good intentions, how we do it makes all the difference in what the results can be.
_________
/
End _______________________________________________________
*Snow, C.P.: The Two Cultures and a Second look. Cambridge University Press (paperback), Cambridge, 1969. pp. 99, 100.
H. H. Giles
Humanics Address
1971
A partial Bibliography
Allport, Gordon W.: Personality, A Psychological Interpretation, Henry Holt and Co., N.Y. 1937
Benedict, Ruth: Patterns of Culture, Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston. 1934
Boas, Franz: "The Growth of Children as Influenced by Enviromental Hereditary Conditions", School and Society, March, 1923.
Brameld, Theodore: The Climatic Decades, Praeger, N.Y., 1970.
Carmichael, L.:"Hereditary and Enviroment: Are they Anti Theoretical?" Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, XX, 1928
Child, C. M.: "The Individual and the Enviroment from a Physiological Viewpoint," in The Child, the Clinic, and the Court, New Republic Publishing Co., N.Y. 1925
Dewey, John: Democracy and Education , the MacMillan Co., N.Y. 1924.
__________: Human Nature and Conduct, An Introduction to Social Psychology, Henry Holt & Co0, Inc., N.Y. 1922
Doggett, Laurence Locke: Man and a School; Pioneering in Higher Education at Springfield College. Association Press, N.Y. 1943.
Einstein, Albert: Out of My Later Years. Philosophical Library, N.Y. 1950.
Ellner, Jack: A Systems Analysis Approach to the Comprehension of Human Behavior Based on an Analog-Synelog Informational Theory: An Exploratory Study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, New York University, N.Y., 1969.
Erickson, Erik H.: "Problems of Infancy and Early Childhood," in Cyclopedia of Medicine, Surgery and Specialties, F.A. Davis Co., Philadelphia, 1940.
Freud, Sigmund: The Basic Writings, Modern Library, N.Y. 1938.
Fromm, Erich: Escape from Freedom, Farrar, Straus & Young, Inc., N.y. 1941.
Giles, H. Harry: Human Dynamics and Human Relations Education. New York University Press, N.Y. 1954.
__________"Conflict Episode Analysis-A Tool for Education in Social Technology," Journal of Educational Sociology, February, 1950.
Giles, H. H. and Chandler Montgomery: The Nature of Human Relations Studies (pam.) New York University, The Center for Human Relations Studies, 1953.
__________, S.P. McCutchen, and A.N. Zechiel: Exploring the Curriculum, Adventure in American Education Series, Vol. II. Harper & Bros., N.Y. 1942.
Giles, H. Harry: "Seven Strangers at the Feast," Teaching Aids News; the Magazine of Educational Technology. June 15, 1965.
Jennings, H.S.: The Biological Basis of Human Nature. W.W. Norton & Co., Inc. N.Y. 1930.
Kohler, Wolfgang: Gestalt Psychology. Sweright Publishing Corp; N.Y. 1921.
Korzybski, Alfred: Science and Sanity, Science Press, N.Y., 1933.
Laing, R.D.: The Politics of Experience, Pantheon Books, N.Y. 1967.
Lewin, Kurt: A Dynamic Theory of Personality. Translated by D.K. Adams and K.E. Zaner, Mc-Graw-Hill Book Co., Inc., N.Y. 1935.
__________ :"The Conceptual Representation and the Measurement of Psychological Forces," Contributions to Psychological Theory, I. No. 4. Serial No. 4. Duke University Press, Durham, N.C., 1938.
Linton, Ralph: The Tree of Culture. Alfred A. Knopf, N.Y. 1955.
Marlow, A.H.: "Self-Actualizing People: "A Study of Psychological Health," in Personality Symposium No. 1, W. Wolff, Editor. Grune & Stratton, 1950.
Loeb, Jacques: The Medianistic Conception of Life. University of Chicago Press., Chicago, 1912.
Nielsen, Page, Rosendal, with others: Lust for Learning., New Experimental College. , Thy, Denmark, 1968.
Pitkin, Royce: The College in a Chaotic World, A Second Look, Goddard College, Plainfield, 1968. (pam.)
Prescott, Daniel: Emotion and the Educative Process. American Council on Education, Washington, D.C. 1938. Riesman, David, with Nathan Glazer and Rue1 Denney: The Lonely Crowd; a Study of the Changing American Character. Yale University Press, New Haven, 1969.
Rogers, Carl R.: On Becoming a Person, Houghton Mifflin Co., Sentry Ed. 60. Boston, 1961.
Schuler, Edgar A., Thomas F. Hoult, Duane L. Gibson, Maude L. Fiero, Wilbur B. Brookover: Readings in Sociology, Second Edition. Thomas Y. Crowell Co., N.Y. 1960.
Sinnott, Edmund W., L.C. Dunn and Dr. Dobzhansky: Principles of Genetics., McGraw-Hill Book Co., N.Y. 1950, P. 405.
Skinner, B.F.: Science and Human Behavior. The Free Press, N.Y. 1965, , paperback.
Snow, C.P.: The Two Cultures and a Second Look. Cambridge University Press (paperback), Cambridge, 1969.
Wheeler, Raymond and Francis Perkins: Principles of Mental Development. Thomas Y. Crowell Co., N.Y., 1932.
Wiener, Norbert: The Human Use of Human Beings. Doubleday Anchor, Garden city, 1954.
Young, Kimball: Personality and Problems of Adjustment, Appleton-Century- Crofts, Inc., N.Y. 1940.

Text and images are owned, held, or licensed by Springfield College and are available for personal, non-commercial, and educational use, provided that ownership is properly cited. A credit line is required and should read: Courtesy of Springfield College, Babson Library, Archives and Special Collections. Any commercial use without written permission from Springfield College is strictly prohibited. Other individuals or entities other than, and in addition to, Springfield College may also own copyrights and other propriety rights. The publishing, exhibiting, or broadcasting party assumes all responsibility for clearing reproduction rights and for any infringement of United States copyright law.